Port & Starboard versus Left and Right
Ecce Homo! Loquitur...
Joined: Jul 2000
Aviation Qualifications: Spotter
Posts: 24,695
Likes: 7,377
From: Peripatetic
In RAF AD up to about 2000 port and starboard were used for commands and left and right for target information.
e.g. “ as I have target 35 left heading 270, starboard 090 for 180 displaced left”.
The reason being that, during comms jamming, the pilots could differentiate between orders and instructions.
The USA and others only used Left and Right so, as we increasingly operated in combined Ops we followed their terminology.
The RN of course favoured the use of green and red for clearing approaches and overflights - resulting in the apocryphal RAF question, “ is that from the sharp end or the blunt end?”….
e.g. “ as I have target 35 left heading 270, starboard 090 for 180 displaced left”.
The reason being that, during comms jamming, the pilots could differentiate between orders and instructions.
The USA and others only used Left and Right so, as we increasingly operated in combined Ops we followed their terminology.
The RN of course favoured the use of green and red for clearing approaches and overflights - resulting in the apocryphal RAF question, “ is that from the sharp end or the blunt end?”….
Thread Starter
Joined: Nov 2010
Posts: 883
Likes: 226
From: Australia
Good to read more about where some of the conventions have come from.
Given the discussion on Britten-Norman aircraft, I looked up the company history on Wikipedia, and this includes:
"During the 1960s, Britten-Norman were involved in the development of hovercraft via their subsidiary Cushioncraft Ltd;[6] their first craft, the CC1, was the world's second hovercraft".
So nautical connections seem to encourage use of Port and Starboard for aircraft.
In the meantime, I have also remembered at least one place where use of Port & Starboard is common (and why I wasn't dreaming this!): Those perspective cutaway drawings of aircraft that regularly turned up in 'Air International' and aircraft encyclopedias have many parts labelled as either port or starboard. At least two companies produced such drawings: Aviagraphica and WEAL (John Weal?) and all those I have looked at from both these illustrators use port and starboard for items such as navigation lights, undercarriage, wing components, engines, fuel tanks, air brakes, etc, etc. I am not sure where those illustrators were/are based.
Given the discussion on Britten-Norman aircraft, I looked up the company history on Wikipedia, and this includes:
"During the 1960s, Britten-Norman were involved in the development of hovercraft via their subsidiary Cushioncraft Ltd;[6] their first craft, the CC1, was the world's second hovercraft".
So nautical connections seem to encourage use of Port and Starboard for aircraft.
In the meantime, I have also remembered at least one place where use of Port & Starboard is common (and why I wasn't dreaming this!): Those perspective cutaway drawings of aircraft that regularly turned up in 'Air International' and aircraft encyclopedias have many parts labelled as either port or starboard. At least two companies produced such drawings: Aviagraphica and WEAL (John Weal?) and all those I have looked at from both these illustrators use port and starboard for items such as navigation lights, undercarriage, wing components, engines, fuel tanks, air brakes, etc, etc. I am not sure where those illustrators were/are based.
Joined: Apr 2004
Aviation Qualifications: LAME
Posts: 2,281
Likes: 189
From: Dorset UK
Need to watch "Strategic Air Command" again to see what James Stewart calls them.
Dixi.
Thread Starter
Joined: Nov 2010
Posts: 883
Likes: 226
From: Australia
The calls are consistent on the numbering: At 1:23 he calls for prop engine start as 4,5,6, then 3,2,1 and at 3:18, on reaching runway, jet start is called as 1,2,3,4.
Joined: Jan 2008
Posts: 17,738
Likes: 2,119
From: Reading, UK
Joined: Nov 2004
Posts: 1,324
Likes: 156
From: Here, there, and everywhere
Been a while since I saw it on TV, so tool a look on www:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9FJVxtTNjJk
The calls are consistent on the numbering: At 1:23 he calls for prop engine start as 4,5,6, then 3,2,1 and at 3:18, on reaching runway, jet start is called as 1,2,3,4.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9FJVxtTNjJk
The calls are consistent on the numbering: At 1:23 he calls for prop engine start as 4,5,6, then 3,2,1 and at 3:18, on reaching runway, jet start is called as 1,2,3,4.
Joined: Jun 2002
Aviation Qualifications: PPL
Posts: 7,177
Likes: 297
From: Nanaimo (CAC8)
Need to watch "Strategic Air Command" again to see what James Stewart calls them.
Joined: Jun 2002
Aviation Qualifications: PPL
Posts: 7,177
Likes: 297
From: Nanaimo (CAC8)
In my UAS days in the late 60s, Port and Starboard were used for formation changes, but I seem to remember that GCA/PAR controllers used Left and Right.
I remember one of my friends wrote Port and Starboard on his white leather flying gloves!
Speaking of flying gloves, why did the RAF persist in using white gloves? They were particularly unsuitable for preflighting a Gipsy Major-powered aircraft! I think I went through a pair a year. Nowadays I have a pair of black USAF Nomex gloves. Much more practical.
I remember one of my friends wrote Port and Starboard on his white leather flying gloves!
Speaking of flying gloves, why did the RAF persist in using white gloves? They were particularly unsuitable for preflighting a Gipsy Major-powered aircraft! I think I went through a pair a year. Nowadays I have a pair of black USAF Nomex gloves. Much more practical.
Joined: Aug 1999
Aviation Qualifications: ATP+Mil
Posts: 4,411
Likes: 83
From: Gold Coast, Australia
I remember one of my friends wrote Port and Starboard on his white leather flying gloves!
Speaking of flying gloves, why did the RAF persist in using white gloves? They were particularly unsuitable for preflighting a Gipsy Major-powered aircraft! I think I went through a pair a year. Nowadays I have a pair of black USAF Nomex gloves. Much more practical.
Speaking of flying gloves, why did the RAF persist in using white gloves? They were particularly unsuitable for preflighting a Gipsy Major-powered aircraft! I think I went through a pair a year. Nowadays I have a pair of black USAF Nomex gloves. Much more practical.
I always assumed the white cape leather was there to make hand signals more obvious; green was introduced for some years but I believe white is available these days? All brands of UK Mil, not just the RAF
On an aside, relating to being visible, when we trialed the then-new green LSJs the first thing we noticed when strapped in was that we could see the instruments without the usual yellow reflections we were used to from the old jackets. Similarly, in FJ vs Wessex intercept trials the glaring aiming point for all jet jockeys was the pilot's white helmet; but many, many years passed before the helmets were changed to green.
Joined: Jul 2014
Posts: 59
Likes: 3
From: Australia
Joined: Nov 1999
Aviation Qualifications: ATPL
Posts: 3,150
Likes: 744
From: UK
The point of specifying 1, 2 etc, for engines is that they are numbered in increasing order from port to starboard as if you were reading a book, where the text goes from left to right across the page.
As well as this, the same convention works for identifying wheels, tyres, brake packs, on multi-wheeled aircraft and of course on aircraft with more than two engines.
As well as this, the same convention works for identifying wheels, tyres, brake packs, on multi-wheeled aircraft and of course on aircraft with more than two engines.
Joined: Jun 2002
Aviation Qualifications: PPL
Posts: 7,177
Likes: 297
From: Nanaimo (CAC8)
I always assumed the white cape leather was there to make hand signals more obvious;
Joined: Jan 2008
Posts: 17,738
Likes: 2,119
From: Reading, UK
Gnome de PPRuNe
Joined: Jan 2002
Aviation Qualifications: Spotter
Posts: 15,201
Likes: 1,202
From: Too close to Croydon for comfort
I have never flown, or been in, a BN2 but I confirmed they do use port and starboard as descriptors:
https://britten-norman.com/app/uploa...Islander-1.pdf
Some references seem to suggest that left, aft, and right were the descriptors used for Trilander engines.
https://britten-norman.com/app/uploa...Islander-1.pdf
Some references seem to suggest that left, aft, and right were the descriptors used for Trilander engines.
Ooops, see somebody else made that observation!